3 ms·
Yes I read that from your other comment, the engineer begins with: > There are many similarities Indeed. And he then goes on to admit that a new version of En
by j_col 14y ago
Yes I read that from your other comment, the engineer begins with:
> There are many similarities
Indeed. And he then goes on to admit that a new version of Enjo JS will address many of the perceived shortcomings in webOS:
> This is a simplification, and I should also note that Enyo 2 (the next version of the webOS application framework, not yet released) is designed to be less platform-specific and allow Enyo apps to run on both webOS and in standard web browsers: http://enyojs.com/ http://enyojs.com/
Enyo JS 2 is now available for download: http://enyojs.com/ http://enyojs.com/
So again, why reinvent the wheel? What's the real benefit of boot-to-Gecko versus boot-to-Webkit (webOS)?
- MatthewPhillips 14y agoFirst off, B2G started well over a year ago, when there were no signs of WebOS becoming open source (it was more likely that it would be sold). So what you're suggesting is that they either have waited or that they should have stopped working when Open WebOS was announced (even though it was just released a few weeks ago). Secondly, the existence of 2 OSes that support the same apps is not a negative; it is an overwhelming positive. Just as having multiple browsers in Windows is positive. The SysApps working group was created to standardize the (currently incompatible) APIs that exist between Firefox OS, Tizen, Chrome OS, and others. http://www.w3.org/2012/05/sysapps-wg-charter.html http://www.w3.org/2012/05/sysapps-wg-charter.html